Interfaces Between Second Language Acquisition and Language Testing Research 1999
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781139524711.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Describing language development? Rating scales and SLA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
38
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
38
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Such a finding would lend strong support to recent efforts to combine insights into language testing with insights into second language acquisition (best exemplified by Bachman & Cohen, 1998), in view of the demonstrable failure of most existing rating scales to properly take account of ideas of language development (Brindley, 1998), and the corresponding difficulty of using existing theoretical models of language development (e.g., Pienemann, et al, 1988) to design viable language tests. Finally, although training in assessment procedures can enable a group of raters to render reliable judgments using a particular rating scale, only raters who, largely because of similarities in their teaching experiences, have shared attitudes toward the acquisition of language proficiency -indeed toward the nature of language proficiency itself -are likely to base their judgments on a shared construct of writing proficiency.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Such a finding would lend strong support to recent efforts to combine insights into language testing with insights into second language acquisition (best exemplified by Bachman & Cohen, 1998), in view of the demonstrable failure of most existing rating scales to properly take account of ideas of language development (Brindley, 1998), and the corresponding difficulty of using existing theoretical models of language development (e.g., Pienemann, et al, 1988) to design viable language tests. Finally, although training in assessment procedures can enable a group of raters to render reliable judgments using a particular rating scale, only raters who, largely because of similarities in their teaching experiences, have shared attitudes toward the acquisition of language proficiency -indeed toward the nature of language proficiency itself -are likely to base their judgments on a shared construct of writing proficiency.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Tuy nhiên, dù là phát triển theo hướng tiếp cận định tính hay định lượng thì các khung năng lực hiện nay vẫn có một số nhược điểm nổi bật như: sự phụ thuộc vào trực giác của chuyên gia, dẫn tới thiếu cơ sở khoa học cho sự tồn tại của năng lực, sự mập mờ trong việc mô tả các cấp độ năng lực: "tốt", "rất tốt", sự thiếu liên quan tới nhóm đối tượng sử dụng khung năng lực, hoặc ngôn ngữ miêu tả không phù hợp và được vay mượn từ các khung năng lực cho đối tượng khác, sự đơn giản hóa quá mức quá trình thực hiện năng lực, dẫn tới miêu tả thiếu các năng lực thành phần.v.v. (Brindley, 1998;North và Schneider, 1998;Weigle, 2002).…”
Section: Hướng Tiếp Cận Xây Dựng Năng Lực Với Trọng Tâm Là Tínhunclassified
“…These problems involve features in the scales which are not seen in actual performances or terminology in descriptors being unnecessarily subjective (e.g. Brindley, 1998;Mickan, 2003;Turner & Upshur, 2002;Upshur & Turner, 1995). Empirically driven scale development has been used in the development of assessment instruments for fluency (e.g.…”
Section: Rating Scale Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Brindley, 1998;Horner, 2013;Turner & Upshur, 2002). Capturing the rater's perspective in situ, however, is less common.…”
Section: Usability In Rating Scale Development Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%